sorry to break this to you, but in the natural world, those things aren't possible. and until you can prove the supernatural thats all we can go by... and another thing, outside of the bible these things never happened
Now you are just presupposing naturalism which makes your argument circular.
Quote Originally Posted by SYSTEM:
sorry to break this to you, but in the natural world, those things aren't possible. and until you can prove the supernatural thats all we can go by... and another thing, outside of the bible these things never happened
Now you are just presupposing naturalism which makes your argument circular.
sorry to break this to you, but in the natural world, those things aren't possible. and until you can prove the supernatural thats all we can go by... and another thing, outside of the bible these things never happened
now who is telling fairy tales.
the natural world wouldn't exist unless it was made.
you can claim we all arrived to this point as some unseen evolution of previous star dust. but in the natural world decays not constructs
construction requires intelligence and no inate object possess it.
not one living thing starts naturally but very unnaturally
if the dinosaurs were to be for your survival of the fittest they would be still. this isn't some natural process that things gone start to live that something started it and we only continues living.
Quote Originally Posted by SYSTEM:
sorry to break this to you, but in the natural world, those things aren't possible. and until you can prove the supernatural thats all we can go by... and another thing, outside of the bible these things never happened
now who is telling fairy tales.
the natural world wouldn't exist unless it was made.
you can claim we all arrived to this point as some unseen evolution of previous star dust. but in the natural world decays not constructs
construction requires intelligence and no inate object possess it.
not one living thing starts naturally but very unnaturally
if the dinosaurs were to be for your survival of the fittest they would be still. this isn't some natural process that things gone start to live that something started it and we only continues living.
I would respond to this but I have no idea what you're trying to express here.
you stated somehow a rapist or a murder gets a free pass to heaven if they ask for forgivness. how would that be their heaven? example a man likes his motorcycle club he likes motor cycles drinking and raising a little hell and being a champion to some poor unfortunate caught in a tight situation.. you think he would be happy in a church full of do gooders in total harmony with peace this would be heaven for him.
now but he would digress to a place he liked.
we might refer this as Swedenborg describes, or more generally lds calls this glory like the stars.
like wise a buddist not harming anything or anyone probly not be comfortable eating meat. his glory would be that of the moon in lds or swedenborgs he would obtain a place of enlightenment.
Quote Originally Posted by Ktrain:
I would respond to this but I have no idea what you're trying to express here.
you stated somehow a rapist or a murder gets a free pass to heaven if they ask for forgivness. how would that be their heaven? example a man likes his motorcycle club he likes motor cycles drinking and raising a little hell and being a champion to some poor unfortunate caught in a tight situation.. you think he would be happy in a church full of do gooders in total harmony with peace this would be heaven for him.
now but he would digress to a place he liked.
we might refer this as Swedenborg describes, or more generally lds calls this glory like the stars.
like wise a buddist not harming anything or anyone probly not be comfortable eating meat. his glory would be that of the moon in lds or swedenborgs he would obtain a place of enlightenment.
If this is so hard for you...lets use another example...
Mao who is an ATHEIST, killed over 3 million people....he thinks that it was right to do such a thing....
You think its wrong....
Who is right or wrong?
Why is this so hard for you? lol.
Groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda kill in the name of God. The God you claim provides objective morality. What kind of objective morality is that?
In the Old Testament God himself wiped out most of the people on the planet, and you think he was just in doing so. Even this violates his "objective" standard of: don't murder.
Murder is wrong. Whether you believe in a holy book or not, it's wrong.
Quote Originally Posted by Rostos:
You still dont get it...
If this is so hard for you...lets use another example...
Mao who is an ATHEIST, killed over 3 million people....he thinks that it was right to do such a thing....
You think its wrong....
Who is right or wrong?
Why is this so hard for you? lol.
Groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda kill in the name of God. The God you claim provides objective morality. What kind of objective morality is that?
In the Old Testament God himself wiped out most of the people on the planet, and you think he was just in doing so. Even this violates his "objective" standard of: don't murder.
Murder is wrong. Whether you believe in a holy book or not, it's wrong.
you stated somehow a rapist or a murder gets a free pass to heaven if they ask for forgivness. how would that be their heaven? example a man likes his motorcycle club he likes motor cycles drinking and raising a little hell and being a champion to some poor unfortunate caught in a tight situation.. you think he would be happy in a church full of do gooders in total harmony with peace this would be heaven for him.
now but he would digress to a place he liked.
we might refer this as Swedenborg describes, or more generally lds calls this glory like the stars.
like wise a buddist not harming anything or anyone probly not be comfortable eating meat. his glory would be that of the moon in lds or swedenborgs he would obtain a place of enlightenment.
Wouldn't God send that person to whatever their own personal heaven would be though?
Either way, the point still stands. Using Christianity as an example: Jerry Sandusky, a child rapist will go to Heaven if he believes in J.C. as his savior.
Myself, as an atheist who has lived an average life with the philosophy of treating others as I would want to be treated, will go to hell.
Does this seem fair and just to you? Does this seem like a doctrine that is worth believing in and defending?
Quote Originally Posted by nature1970:
you stated somehow a rapist or a murder gets a free pass to heaven if they ask for forgivness. how would that be their heaven? example a man likes his motorcycle club he likes motor cycles drinking and raising a little hell and being a champion to some poor unfortunate caught in a tight situation.. you think he would be happy in a church full of do gooders in total harmony with peace this would be heaven for him.
now but he would digress to a place he liked.
we might refer this as Swedenborg describes, or more generally lds calls this glory like the stars.
like wise a buddist not harming anything or anyone probly not be comfortable eating meat. his glory would be that of the moon in lds or swedenborgs he would obtain a place of enlightenment.
Wouldn't God send that person to whatever their own personal heaven would be though?
Either way, the point still stands. Using Christianity as an example: Jerry Sandusky, a child rapist will go to Heaven if he believes in J.C. as his savior.
Myself, as an atheist who has lived an average life with the philosophy of treating others as I would want to be treated, will go to hell.
Does this seem fair and just to you? Does this seem like a doctrine that is worth believing in and defending?
Wouldn't God send that person to whatever their own personal heaven would be though?
Either way, the point still stands. Using Christianity as an example: Jerry Sandusky, a child rapist will go to Heaven if he believes in J.C. as his savior.
Myself, as an atheist who has lived an average life with the philosophy of treating others as I would want to be treated, will go to hell.
Does this seem fair and just to you? Does this seem like a doctrine that is worth believing in and defending?
that is Swedenborg doctrine all good people regardless of religion go to their form of heaven.
Swedenborg started a church as a form of protest to the catholic church.
lds better known as Mormonism also states all good people go to a form of glory.
both are Christian in the sense they believe Jesus is Lord,
Quote Originally Posted by Ktrain:
Wouldn't God send that person to whatever their own personal heaven would be though?
Either way, the point still stands. Using Christianity as an example: Jerry Sandusky, a child rapist will go to Heaven if he believes in J.C. as his savior.
Myself, as an atheist who has lived an average life with the philosophy of treating others as I would want to be treated, will go to hell.
Does this seem fair and just to you? Does this seem like a doctrine that is worth believing in and defending?
that is Swedenborg doctrine all good people regardless of religion go to their form of heaven.
Swedenborg started a church as a form of protest to the catholic church.
lds better known as Mormonism also states all good people go to a form of glory.
both are Christian in the sense they believe Jesus is Lord,
Groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda kill in the name of God. The God you claim provides objective morality. What kind of objective morality is that?
In the Old Testament God himself wiped out most of the people on the planet, and you think he was just in doing so. Even this violates his "objective" standard of: don't murder.
Murder is wrong. Whether you believe in a holy book or not, it's wrong.
the sons of god and daughters of man made breeds by that time so thoroughly offended him he repented he made them. gen 1:6;
the only hope for man was a drunk NOAH
Quote Originally Posted by Ktrain:
Why is this so hard for you? lol.
Groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda kill in the name of God. The God you claim provides objective morality. What kind of objective morality is that?
In the Old Testament God himself wiped out most of the people on the planet, and you think he was just in doing so. Even this violates his "objective" standard of: don't murder.
Murder is wrong. Whether you believe in a holy book or not, it's wrong.
the sons of god and daughters of man made breeds by that time so thoroughly offended him he repented he made them. gen 1:6;
Groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda kill in the name of God. The God you claim provides objective morality. What kind of objective morality is that?
In the Old Testament God himself wiped out most of the people on the planet, and you think he was just in doing so. Even this violates his "objective" standard of: don't murder.
Murder is wrong. Whether you believe in a holy book or not, it's wrong.
Murder is wrong according to who?
Better put, is it a fact that murder is wrong? If you answer yes to this, you are actually a Theist.
Quote Originally Posted by Ktrain:
Why is this so hard for you? lol.
Groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda kill in the name of God. The God you claim provides objective morality. What kind of objective morality is that?
In the Old Testament God himself wiped out most of the people on the planet, and you think he was just in doing so. Even this violates his "objective" standard of: don't murder.
Murder is wrong. Whether you believe in a holy book or not, it's wrong.
Murder is wrong according to who?
Better put, is it a fact that murder is wrong? If you answer yes to this, you are actually a Theist.
Please do explain how me believing murder is wrong makes me a theist.
Because rights and wrongs ONLY exist in relation to facts.
If you say murder is wrong, then you are claiming that it is a FACT that it is wrong to murder. This is what is called moral realism.
If moral realism is true, then moral facts exist in the world. The question then is.....what are moral facts doing existing in a world if you dont believe God exists?
Remember, FACTS are DISCOVERED.
Before you answer, think first.
Quote Originally Posted by Ktrain:
Please do explain how me believing murder is wrong makes me a theist.
Because rights and wrongs ONLY exist in relation to facts.
If you say murder is wrong, then you are claiming that it is a FACT that it is wrong to murder. This is what is called moral realism.
If moral realism is true, then moral facts exist in the world. The question then is.....what are moral facts doing existing in a world if you dont believe God exists?
Wouldn't God send that person to whatever their own personal heaven would be though?
Either way, the point still stands. Using Christianity as an example: Jerry Sandusky, a child rapist will go to Heaven if he believes in J.C. as his savior.
Myself, as an atheist who has lived an average life with the philosophy of treating others as I would want to be treated, will go to hell.
Does this seem fair and just to you? Does this seem like a doctrine that is worth believing in and defending?
What's so hard to understand? God is an insecure little girl who doesn't care about anything else except whether or not a person kisses his behind. Like a really bad boss.
He is also a sick motherf**** that likes to torture innocent people for no reason. But that's another issue.
Quote Originally Posted by Ktrain:
Wouldn't God send that person to whatever their own personal heaven would be though?
Either way, the point still stands. Using Christianity as an example: Jerry Sandusky, a child rapist will go to Heaven if he believes in J.C. as his savior.
Myself, as an atheist who has lived an average life with the philosophy of treating others as I would want to be treated, will go to hell.
Does this seem fair and just to you? Does this seem like a doctrine that is worth believing in and defending?
What's so hard to understand? God is an insecure little girl who doesn't care about anything else except whether or not a person kisses his behind. Like a really bad boss.
He is also a sick motherf**** that likes to torture innocent people for no reason. But that's another issue.